The second phase will involve deinstalling this first piece from several months of public installation, removing the technological aspects, and placing the physical sculpture within a monocropped tree planting initiative forest to introduce biodiversity to these greenwashed and unsustainable areas. It will be stewarded by volunteers who will ensure the organic materials are surviving and spreading.

First phase: hibernation 

Second phase: unseen by the human public - art that does not need an audience - art for the nonhuman world. Audience of plants and creatures who will become collaborators with the piece itself

Maybe woodlands are not the right place for this piece?

Will need to collaborate with biologists and programmers in order to develop each stage of the project

Dulwich woods: less for the human audience than for enriching the biodiversity of these woods to pay homage to its ancient history

Perhaps focus on rewilding a smaller area of land within a city during the second phase rather than trying to cover a forest - even large sculpture will not get far and will need stewardship in a remote location

Looked into possibility of using device that reads electromagnetic signals within plants and translates them into music but this seems to be pseudoscience :(

Plants respond positively to sounds of certain frequencies!!
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpls.2018.00025/full#:~:text=Sound%20promotes%20plant%20growth%20by,plant%20defense%20responses%20against%20pathogens.

Ensuring the sound will not disrupt wildlife - Sound will only play when exposed to presence from 50cm away or direct touch. Will play with reverb and a slight delay so the transitions are not too contrasting. Sound will be soft so as not to harm wildlife and will not play during the night due to absence of light. = echoes of ancient nature that are not always present

Probably will not be touched consistently for over 2-3 hours per day

Creating a commentary on the ways in which art materials can be harmful to the environment - want to suggest ways that art can be used in conjunction with natural processes without creating more eventual pollution

Seeing the pieces as gifts/a dialogue between human and nonhuman environments

I envision this project as taking place over several years. In order to develop a material for the obelisks that will provide optimal nutrients for the survival of the species they will host, I will need to work with biologists - I feel that this collaboration will be beneficial in demonstrating that the boundary between art and science is a false one, and that envisioning alternate futures for our ecosystems will require 

Emphasising interconnectedness - your movements affect your environment

Potentially unlocked by water? 

Perhaps they should be woven???

I intend for this piece to feel like a cohesive part of each environment it exists in, not to feel like a fragile, sterile art piece. I therefore intend for the terracotta material to stand up to some interaction and touch from members of the public during the first phase; it is not essential that the obelisks remain unchanged, and I feel that it would benefit from looking as though they have been touched. 

MAYBE they should not move locations at all - might be more impactful and cohesive to have the pieces stay in one place while their appearance changes - maybe it should pass from naked earth into a growing part of the landscape without moving??

‘The Reservoir’ - John Grade - work that engages with natural environments with no negative impact

The Waiting Room - Sarah Sze - immersive use of technology

Chris Watson’s sound pieces sampled from nature

Sean Vicary -  ecologically focused work

Spirit Jars - Natasha V. Moody - tribute to Great North Wood